Bureaucrats, steward, Administrators, translator
2,307
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 1:
Line 1: + + Line 19:
Line 21: − + − + − + − + − + − + + + + + Line 41:
Line 47: + +
New Top-Level Domain Applicant Group (view source)
Revision as of 00:34, 21 June 2024
, 3 months agoChristiane moved page NTAG to New Top-Level Domain Applicant Group: Standardize
Currently in [http://www.rysg.info/ntag '''dormant state'''] ( in June 2015 it was sunset after the majority of new gTLD applicants had moved through the process to become full-fledged Registry Operators).
The '''New Top-Level Domain Applicant Group''' (or '''NTAG''') is an interest group formed under Article III.D. of the Charter of the gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group ([[RySG]]). The primary role of the NTAG is to represent the interests of entities that applied for a new gTLD(s) in [[ICANN]]'s 2012 gTLD round. The NTAG represents the views of its members to the RySG, the [[GNSO]] Council, the ICANN Board of Directors, and other influential bodies.
The '''New Top-Level Domain Applicant Group''' (or '''NTAG''') is an interest group formed under Article III.D. of the Charter of the gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group ([[RySG]]). The primary role of the NTAG is to represent the interests of entities that applied for a new gTLD(s) in [[ICANN]]'s 2012 gTLD round. The NTAG represents the views of its members to the RySG, the [[GNSO]] Council, the ICANN Board of Directors, and other influential bodies.
===Strawman Proposal===
===Strawman Proposal===
In January 2013, The NTAG was one of about 85 entities to respond to [[ICANN]]'s [[Strawman Proposal]], which is a strategy for implementing rights protection mechanisms (RPMs) for brands and trademark holders beyond what was originally included in the applicant guidebook on new TLDs.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11619-new-gtld-strawman-splits-community?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DomainIncite+%28DomainIncite.com%29 Strawman Splits Community, DomainIncite.com]Published & Retrieved 16 Jan 2013]</ref> The NTAG, and others, see the closed-door meetings that produced the more stringent and broader RPMs to be against the ICANN development process that created the [[New gTLD Program]] and the governing applicant guidebook.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11064-straw-man-proposed-to-settle-trademark-deadlock-at-secretive-icann-meeting Strawman Proposed to Settle Trademark Deadlock at Secretive ICANN meeting, DomainIncite.com]Published Novemeber 19 2012, Retrieved 17 Jan 2013</ref> They note that any positive decision related to the Strawman would be unwelcome 'implementation' rather than 'development'. It encourages ICANN to present its proposed changes to the [[GNSO]] to allow for community development.<ref>[http://forum.icann.org/lists/tmch-strawman/pdf7OB7v1fQzV.pdf TMCH Strawman, Forum.ICANN.org]
In January 2013, The NTAG was one of about 85 entities to respond to [[ICANN]]'s [[Strawman Proposal]], which is a strategy for implementing rights protection mechanisms (RPMs) for brands and trademark holders beyond what was originally included in the applicant guidebook on new TLDs.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11619-new-gtld-strawman-splits-community?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DomainIncite+%28DomainIncite.com%29 Strawman Splits Community, DomainIncite.com]Published & Retrieved 16 Jan 2013]</ref> The NTAG, and others, see the closed-door meetings that produced the more stringent and broader RPMs to be against the ICANN development process that created the [[New gTLD Program]] and the governing applicant guidebook.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11064-straw-man-proposed-to-settle-trademark-deadlock-at-secretive-icann-meeting Strawman Proposed to Settle Trademark Deadlock at Secretive ICANN meeting, DomainIncite.com]Published Novemeber 19 2012, Retrieved 17 Jan 2013</ref> They note that any positive decision related to the Strawman would be unwelcome 'implementation' rather than 'development'. It encourages ICANN to present its proposed changes to the [[GNSO]] to allow for community development.<ref>[http://forum.icann.org/lists/tmch-strawman/pdf7OB7v1fQzV.pdf TMCH Strawman, Forum.ICANN.org]Retrieved 17 Jan 2013</ref>
==Current Officers==
===New TLD Registry Agreement===
* [[Jon Nevett]], [[Donuts]] Inc., Chair
In February 2013, it was revealed that ICANN was pushing for a "unilateral right to amend" in both its [[Registry Agreement|New TLD Registry Agreement]] and the [[Registrar Accreditation Agreement]]. The point would give the [[ICANN Board]] to amend the Agreement with a 2/3 majority vote, under the current registry agreement special amendments need the approval of registries representing two-thirds of all registry fees paid to ICANN before they became law. The NTAG issued a letter saying that the move was, "nothing more than a power grab by ICANN staff." ICANN and its defenders claim that the change is necessary given the large amount of new registries to be created and prepare for any future Registry Agreements, where getting hundreds of operators to agree will be near impossible as evidenced by the 18 months spent working on the most recent [[Registrar Accreditation Agreement]] (RAA).<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11850-icann-seeks-more-power-over-new-gtld-registries ICANN Seeks More Power Over New gTLD Registries, DomainIncite.com] 1 April 2013</ref>
* [[Bill Doshier]], [[dotStrategy]] Co., Vice Chair
* [http://news.dot-nxt.com/sites/news.dot-nxt.com/files/ntag-letter-icann-registry-pic.pdf NTAG letter to ICANN on New TLD Registry Agreement]
* [[Tim Switzer]], [[DotGreen|DotGreen Community Inc.]], Treasurer
* [[Krista Papac]], [[Aremi Group]], Secretary
==Officers as of JUN 2015==
* [[Samantha Demetriou]], [[Fairwinds Partners]], Chair
* [[Maxim Alzoba]], [[FAITID]], Vice Chair
* [[Will Ellis]], [[Nominet]], Treasurer
* [[Susan Payne]], [[Valideus]], Secretary
==NTAG Teams==
==NTAG Teams==
== References ==
== References ==
<references/>
<references/>
__NOTOC__